-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 201
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Use Alpine as base Docker image #119
Conversation
Fixes openebs/openebs#287 Signed-off-by: Micheal Waltz <ecliptik@gmail.com>
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #119 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 19.86% 19.86%
=======================================
Files 58 58
Lines 7419 7419
=======================================
Hits 1474 1474
Misses 5838 5838
Partials 107 107 Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
@ecliptik -- that a significant improvement in size! Couple of questions:
|
There is no https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/watch The Without |
Thanks @ecliptik Just one more question, earlier (am an year out-dated here), there used to be an "opinion" not to use alpine based images in production. Do you know if this view is changing now? Are there some examples of official docker images moving towards alpine.. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
@kmova In regards to Alpine in production, we use it in a few different applications and it is stable as Ubuntu. The only major issue we've run into is dns resolution in musl libc when using service discovery within container orchestration. For the most part this has been resolved though (see gliderlabs/docker-alpine#8). Almost all Docker Official Images have an Alpine variant. The only major difference right now is Alpine does not have full multi-arch support, which should be resolved shortly (gliderlabs/docker-alpine#304). |
@kmova sync'd with master and Dockerfile is in the correct directory now |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Many many thanks @ecliptik - for this feature enhancement as well as the detailed notes that makes a good case for using alpine images.
@ecliptik , I still see some issues with DNS resolution in alpine (understood as much from the thread referred as well ). Here is my resolv.conf :
The issue renders even the CLI commands on the maya container way too slow (confirmed by setting the nameserver to 127.0.0.1, which immediately restores the speed - but we don't want this, right)
|
What this PR does / why we need it:
Reduces size of artifact Docker images by using Alpine Linux, comparisons between
ubuntu:16.04
andalpine:3.6
Which issue this PR fixes
Fixes openebs/openebs#287
Special notes for your reviewer:
Tested by running both images locally and applications started up properly using Alpine based container.